Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You post a topic asking us to in someway prove a point for you? if you believe god exists it should be up to you to prove that point not for us to disprove it.
So prove god exists and we can then apply some scientific method as to why he doesnt exist.
The point we are at now is merely you saying he does exist and me saying he doesnt,equally relevant opinions , however relying on opinions as proof is a rather vacuous way to proof anything..
My definition of atheist is that demographic of people who dont care one bit for religion, they dont think about it,dont talk about it and basically do not include any aspect of religion in their lives.
Really it is down to the person claiming there is a god to define it. Not the people who are not buying what you are selling. Alas the reason this thread has ended in such a mess is that you asked people to explain how your god does not exist.... but your definition of it as being a mere "metaphor" leaves nothing TO BE disproven. You are saying nothing at all, describing nothing at all, then asking people to show how that nothing does not exist. It is a non sense.
It doesn't really help that the OP shows he doesn't have a good understanding of what a metaphor is or how metaphors are used.
No, we are saying GOD is everything and a process of our minds, and sticking to it.
You'll have to take that up with the poster I'm responding to, since he specifically said that his version of god is just a process in the brain.
That's the great part about these fuzzy concepts of god - even believers don't know what they're talking about when flinging around these various ideas. And for some reason atheists get blamed for not falling for it.
Can we please leave the whole "left brain/right brain" myth from the 1960's behind? Given your post, the irony is rather funny, but it just perpetuates nonsense.
Even ignoring that, the objection is basically saying "stop being so logical, you're destroying my faith". That's not an argument.
You don't BELIEVE that the universe is conscious and you don't BELIEVE there is any reason to believe it is so. This is always the hangup . . . consciousness. There are plenty of reasons to believe it . . . you just don't think so.
The reason we do not believe it is you have not yet suggested any reason why we should. Nor has anyone else. Really so far - the sum total of your offering on the matter has been that you thought you were meditating one day - or sleeping or whatever - and you felt there was a god. That is literally it. Exactly what do you think _should_ convince us the universe is conscious if that is literally all you have to offer us on the subject?
Other than that you just tell us a lot of what consciousness is that. A mix of stating the obvious - and total assertions - all mixed in together about what it is not. But again - what there should be convincing us exactly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
I have said that if you do NOT take your meditation practice well beyond the known commercial bunkum of the meditation schools . . . you will not achieve the subjective evidence you require. But if you DO . . . it will be incontrovertible.
In other words - if we start beleiving you then we will believe you - but if we do not - even those of us who do strongly engage with meditation - then we must just be "doing it wrong" somehow.
Bit of stacking of the cards in your stack there - huh.
Then where is all the posturing about people having no reason not to believe you coming from?
There is no "posturing about people having no reason NOT to believe," KC . . . just an effort to stop the unsupportable posturing of those who claim there is "not one shred of evidence or reason TO believe." Either position is untenable given the ineffable and largely inscrutable character of our reality. Pretending otherwise is just plain annoying . . . if not deliberately baiting.
This is why you fail to understand me, Jay. I have never claimed to have the kind of evidence YOU require for the certainty I possess. That is why I stress that consciousness itself is entirely subjective and only detected subjectively by another consciousness. I have that subjective evidence that you lack, period.
What I have been stressing with the "reality = God" concept is that the EXISTENCE of God is established . . . whatever YOU choose to BELIEVE about it. What I BELIEVE about it is clear.We can engage in the same kind of intellectual debate that I had with the "expert" on physics . . . although the audience here was unable to follow it and the "expert" was unable to advance his position beyond mine. The problem with experts is they USE the math and the concepts they create to model our reality . . . but they seldom understand what the philosophy of science implications of them are. Another fellow here seems not to comprehend this difference either. It is quite annoying. I await your efforts to educate me, Jay.
Again with the solid evidence instead of the evidence sufficient as reason to believe! The refusal to acknowledge this difference is the sole source of dispute with me. If the requirements as "reason to BELIEVE" are the same as the requirements to KNOW . . . there is no point in making the distinction . . . is there?
What separates your view from my certainty is the subjective evidence I possess sufficient for me to KNOW. You do not have that . . . so you do not even BELIEVE. Why is it that distinction seems so resistant to intellectual evaluation?
Again with the NO evidence . . . You consistently refuse to acknowledge what IS known science as providing any "reason to BELIEVE" . . . when what you mean is not sufficient evidence for YOU to KNOW. I will grant you that your confusion on this point probably stems from the fact that I have sufficient subjective evidence beyond the known science to KNOW . . . but I have consistently said that it is why I BELIEVE it. It is our BELIEFS that differ and it is your insistence on the absurd "not one shred of evidence or reason to BELIEVE" that grates.
Granted that the leap to a universal consciousness field may SEEM to be a big one . . . but once a conscious reality is acknowledged there is no leap to consider it God. What else would a conscious reality BE relative to us?
The additional BELIEFS I attach really seem to be the REAL sticking points for the anti-religion atheists . . . despite my repeated acknowledgment that they are my BELIEFS based on inference and implications derived from the "spiritual fossil record."
Ah . . . I see your confusion about measurement, Jay. It is the subjective conscious interaction with another consciousness that enables the assessment that no other consciousness appears to be present. The lack of response characteristic of a consciousness is deemed evidence of a lack of consciousness. But whether comatose or dead requires other measurements that are NOT consciousness itself . . . because we can NOT measure consciousness directly. That is what I mean by the SUBJECTIVE consciousness to consciousness evaluation of its presence. I mean we lack the ability to measure consciousness directly, Jay.
It is the context within which you place the extant evidence that accounts for your skepticism, Jay. You see it as tricking the brain.I see it as turning on the field sensing capabilities of the brain. The latter is evidenced by the sensitivity to measurable EM fields. I do NOT think measurable EM fields that comprise less than 5% of our reality are what the brain normally responds to. I believe it responds to the unmeasurable universal field that manifests as dark energy and dark matter that comprise the BULK of our reality = God . . . hence the emphasis on prayer and meditation to access it. "Be quiet and KNOW that I am God."
I have said that if you do NOT take your meditation practice well beyond the known commercial bunkum of the meditation schools . . . you will not achieve the subjective evidence you require. But if you DO . . . it will be incontrovertible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by monumentus
The reason we do not believe it is you have not yet suggested any reason why we should. Nor has anyone else. Really so far - the sum total of your offering on the matter has been that you thought you were meditating one day - or sleeping or whatever - and you felt there was a god. That is literally it. Exactly what do you think _should_ convince us the universe is conscious if that is literally all you have to offer us on the subject?
Other than that you just tell us a lot of what consciousness is that. A mix of stating the obvious - and total assertions - all mixed in together about what it is not. But again - what there should be convincing us exactly?In other words - if we start beleiving you then we will believe you - but if we do not - even those of us who do strongly engage with meditation - then we must just be "doing it wrong" somehow.
Bit of stacking of the cards in your stack there - huh.
You have intimated that you are a meditator . . . probably one with some extensive experience. I accept your claims but suggest that you have not taken it to the depth necessary to validate my experiences . . . heart rate routinely below 30bpm and breathing barely detectable while retaining conscious control as observer. If you are a proficient meditator . . . it should not require much additional skill to replicate my experiences. By retaining conscious control . . . you can even conduct your own subjective experiments to satisfy yourself it is indeed a consciousness. There is no need to rely on my assertions.
Not believing in ANY FORM OF GOD is atheism. Someone like me, who doesn't believe in a PERSONAL GOD but still believes in a HIGHER POWER is not an atheist.
Thing is, the definition of atheism "new atheist thinkers" are going on are based solely on orthodox Abrahamic religions that don't make room for a non-personal or transpersonal conceptualization of GOD, let alone a metaphorical (Jungian) conceptualization.
Now that we know about pantheistic religions, we know that it is possible to not believe in a personal GOD while not being an atheist.
I think this is a good direction to take.
When a person dies with a belief in a higher power or pantheistic beliefs, do they believe something is supposed to happen, like meet this higher power?
it should not require much additional skill to replicate my experiences.
You assume that I have not replicated them. I have had experiences that very much sound like the things you purport to have experienced. I just do not assign the same nonsense explanations to them that you do - because I recognise that explaining them away with the explanation I _want_ to be true is not a valid approach.
And further I am aware of the neurology behind many of those experiences and that they can be replicated artificially and so forth. When one meditates one can have a feeling of a presence - or the feeling of everything being interconnected - or a feeling of a universal love - or another common one is just a feeling that everything is _relevant_ in some amplified way. Everything - every connection - every movement - drips with relevance like fat off a baking goose.
I am aware of all these emotions and impressions and feelings. I just do not use those feelings to spew ridiculous nonsense about gods and sentient universes that are otherwise entirely baseless in evidence.
And it seems that your sole approach to the topic is to suggest - directly or indirectly - that anyone who does not share your conclusions is somehow deficient - blind - or doing it wrong. That just stacks the deck in your favor. Where people agree with your nonsense - you accept that. Where they do not - you can simply dismiss them out of hand as merely failing to achieve what you did in some way.
So yes - your assertions backed up solely by your deriding those that do not agree - is _all_ we have to go on here.
You assert that you can verify that what is behind those feelings is a consciousness. I agree. 100%. It is _your conciousness_. There is a complete lack of any arguments coming from you to support the notion that you are accessing or meeting some dark matter hidden away "other" consciousness through the power of your mind. You are simply making that part up because you like the idea.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
